German researchers have discovered that mainstream parties are increasingly letting the far right dictate the political agenda. They describe this as a flaw that unintentionally aids the far right by making their ideas seem acceptable and spreading them more widely.
The study, published in the European Journal of Political Research, analyzed over 520,000 articles from six German newspapers spanning more than two decades. Researchers in Berlin found that as the far right shifted from marginal topics in the late 1990s to issues like integration and migration, mainstream parties adjusted their messaging in response. This amplified the reach of far-right ideas and signaled to voters that such views were legitimate.
Teresa Völker, a political sociologist at the Berlin Social Science Center and co-author of the study, emphasized that this trend has serious consequences for democracy. “Mainstream parties’ communication strategies are crucial to the far right’s electoral success,” she said. “This aspect has been overlooked.”
Even when mainstream parties criticize the far right, they still give them attention, which Völker notes is key in today’s attention-driven society. “Whoever controls the agenda influences what voters think and how they vote,” she explained.
Daniel Saldivia Gonzatti, another co-author and political sociologist at the same center, suggested that while the research focused on Germany, this normalization effect likely applies across Europe. He pointed to German and British media, where far-right statements often dominate headlines for days, even when met with criticism. “Even if you’re pushing back, you’re still repeating their message,” he said.
Sometimes, leaders have toughened their rhetoric to mirror the far right. For example, in a 2023 interview, then-German Chancellor Olaf Scholz called for large-scale deportations of those without legal status and urged faster, more frequent deportations nationwide.
Similar patterns are seen throughout Europe, with politicians in countries like the UK and France adopting far-right language on migration, creating an echo chamber that would have been unimaginable a decade ago.
Saldivia Gonzatti highlighted that the core issue is who sets the tone and topics. “If moderate parties discuss cultural issues like migration in a way dictated by the far right’s pace, that’s agenda setting in action.”
Some parties have gone further, adopting hardline stances similar to the far right, even though studies indicate this may drive voters toward far-right parties themselves.
Völker noted that the extensive data showed the far right’s influence has grown gradually over time. “Public opinion doesn’t shift overnight, but when negative framing about migration is repeated every few weeks—not just by far-right groups but also by parties like the Social Democrats—the narrative gains traction.”
These findings support earlier research on the normalization of the far right, whether through mainstream parties forming coalitions with them or through extensive media coverage.If you don’t have an account, we’ll create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete your full registration anytime. For details on how we handle your data, please refer to our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to secure our website, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
In this instance, researchers were taken aback by the far right’s significant influence. Saldivia Gonzatti noted, “We expected that right-wing parties would be more responsive to the far right’s agenda, but our findings show that the impact is widespread.” The study also revealed that opposition parties were more susceptible to this influence than those in government.
Völker suggested that similar patterns are likely across Europe, with the exception of Nordic countries. There, she explained, far-right influence has reached a “second stage,” expanding beyond cultural issues to encompass a broader range of topics. “Since mainstream parties have already adopted some of the far right’s positions on migration, they’ve moved beyond the point where the far right solely dictates the agenda on that issue,” Völker said.
Saldivia Gonzatti emphasized the importance of mainstream parties developing their own narratives, especially on migration and integration, instead of merely following the far right’s lead. He likened it to a dance: “If the far right is leading and you’re just reacting, you can’t choose the music that’s playing.”
Frequently Asked Questions
Of course Here is a list of FAQs about the study revealing that Germanys farright is shaping the political debate with clear and concise answers
Basic Understanding Definitions
1 What is the main finding of this study
The study found that Germanys farright party the AfD is successfully setting the topics of public discussion Even when other parties and media argue against the AfDs ideas they are still talking about the AfDs chosen issues which gives the party more visibility and influence
2 What does shaping the political debate mean
It means the farright is deciding what topics everyone else is talking about like migration or national identity They set the agenda forcing other political groups to respond to their claims and ideas
3 Who is the farright in Germany
It primarily refers to the political party Alternative for Germany The party is known for its nationalist antiimmigration and Eurosceptic views
4 How are opponents inadvertently spreading farright ideas
By constantly reacting to and denouncing the AfDs statements opponents keep those very statements in the news and on social media This repeated exposure even in a negative light can make the ideas seem more mainstream and familiar to the public
Mechanisms Deeper Analysis
5 What is the Overton Window and how does it relate to this
The Overton Window is the range of ideas tolerated in public discourse By constantly pushing radical ideas the farright can shift this window making previously unacceptable topics seem like a normal part of political debate over time
6 Isnt it important to challenge and factcheck farright claims
Yes it is crucial However the study highlights a strategic dilemma when the only response is to repeat and refute a false claim it can unintentionally amplify the original message The challenge is to reframe the conversation around positive alternative visions instead of just reacting
7 Can you give an example of this happening
A common example is when the AfD makes a sweeping negative claim about immigrants The 24hour news cycle and political opponents then spend days debunking it The public remembers the core claim more than the complex factcheck and the
